Development of an emissions reporting framework

There was a general sense that the most urgent priority for the ICT sector is to agree a (global) standard framework to measure carbon emissions. This would allow for more accurate environmental impact assessments as well as like-for-like performance benchmarking. Such an initiative could give ICT companies the incentives to become more energy-efficient.

But concerns were also voiced. One was that a framework could cause organisations to be more secretive - loathe to reveal sensitive figures – and some participants questioned the feasibility of accurate data capture. One pointed out that: "I don't think there's any way of getting robust data on embedded carbon in equipment in the short to medium term." Another with experience in environmental performance measurement said: "I'm sceptical about how robust it might be."

Clear network energy measuring standard

Managing the growth in network energy usage is a significant challenge for the ICT industry. The uptake of cloud computing and consequent increase in network traffic means that networks account for an increasing share of ICT related energy use. So what's the solution? Panellists thought that a clear standard is needed, not just to measure the impact of network energy usage, but to benchmark efficiency parameters and goals, and to provide a proven pathway for the sustainable development of cloud based solutions. Some research is already moving in this direction: eg a JISC funded sustainability e-learning plan, which factors in network greenness. But there are significant challenges in linking energy consumption to a particular provider, not least because of the trend towards resource sharing between cloud providers. One participant pointed out that "parts of a webpage, such as video, may be hosted by a third party, meaning that it is no longer a direct GHG emission for the company, and furthermore, the location of this hosting may change dynamically".

Given this, what's the best way to move forward? The discussion produced these suggestions:

• It was recommended that ICT providers report on scope one and scope two emissions, as per the GHG protocol. Doing so would more accurately reflect their consumption and emissions profiles. Making these figures public would also encourage stakeholders to take informed decisions on improving their sustainability.

• ICT providers should also measure their efficiency gains and compare them with industry benchmarks. It was perceived that this is not currently happening.

• To improve sustainability across the supply chain, better collaboration between providers and suppliers is paramount. BT was cited as providing examples of good practice in its measurement and reporting workshops with key suppliers, and its development of a sustainable procurement standard. The growth in internet demand is outpacing the efficiency gains from new technologies, and for the foreseeable future, consumption figures look set to keep rising. This only heightens the importance of achieving energy efficiencies.

Renewables to power the cloud?

The idea that the cloud could be powered by renewable energy sparked a flurry of comments. This could help to mitigate the emissions impact of the ICT sector and push other industries to follow suit. One participant said: "The choice of renewable energy could do a huge service to the world in sparking growth of renewable industries, as we need to get to 100% renewable by 2050…." But there was some concern that powering the cloud with renewables would risk increasing supply costs due to its expensive nature, and push up prices for the end user. In a price led market, this could impede consumer uptake of more sustainable cloud computing options - unless the development is industry-wide, or (dis)incentives are effective in changing behaviour. So what are the big players in cloud computing doing? It was noted that Google, Microsoft and Yahoo have all started investing in renewable energy research. This is a step in the right direction, but some participants felt the same firms are not being sufficiently transparent about their broader energy footprint and climate impacts.

e-Waste

Discussion centred on who should be responsible for the cost of e-waste. It was generally felt that manufacturers should finance the cost of treating and recovering end-of-life products, as per the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) directive. Manufacturers should also follow the Carbon Trust's advice in respect of addressing opportunities across the product lifecycle to optimise re-use, design in modular upgrades, or effect safe disposal.

The panel

•Matthew Bateson, managing director for energy and climate at the World Business Council for Sustainable Development.

•Pankaj Bhatia, director of the GHG protocol initiative at the World Resources Institute.

•Peter James, Professor of environmental management at the University of Bradford

•Rob Jones, ICT sector lead, Carbon Trust advisory services.

•Chris Preist, reader in sustainability and computer systems at the University of Bristol.